not sure I understand those examples, but the moment a developer starts yelding everything, is the moment all non-blovking asynchronous advantages are gone 'cause you are waiting instead of keep doing the rest, isn't it?
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Domenic Denicola < [email protected]> wrote: > This looks lovely. > > The only thing I'd want to add: we need integers! And generally better > numeric types. From speaking to developers on the ground, this is the > biggest missing language feature they see (that isn't already addressed in > ES6). I know Brendan has made some moves in this direction in SpiderMonkey, > so let's just be sure it doesn't fall off the roadmap :). > > Doing a quick poll of some IRC rooms, there's some call for shared-memory > multithreading. I know this was a concern of the asm.js project, or more > generally for the JS-as-a-compilation-target mission. I don't think this is > a good idea, but just passing it along. > > Finally, I know a lot of people, myself included, are excited about > `await` sugar. That is, the plan would be to use generators + promises in > ES6 with the awkwardness that entails; once we know what the prevailing > patterns are we can eliminate that awkwardness with `await` in ES7. (I've > made [a sketch][1] illustrating the idea, but of course the point of > waiting is to find something that works, not the first thing I think up.) > How this fits in with the concurrency strawman's more ambitious `!` > operator is unclear though. > > [1]: https://gist.github.com/domenic/5428522 > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
